https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186818 A Supreme Court analysis of an acquittal found that minor discrepancies between ocular and medical evidence did not undermine the prosecution case where eyewitnesses gave a consistent account and the post-mortem findings remained compatible with their version. Allegations of ante-timing in the first information report were treated as explainable and insufficient, by themselves, to infer fabrication or a different date of occurrence. The rejection of an independent eyewitness was criticised as conjectural because his testimony had no intrinsic infirmity and was corroborated by surrounding circumstances. The note also states that appellate interference with acquittal is justified where the trial or appellate court misreads evidence and reaches a perverse conclusion. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Oct 2016 16:08:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186818 A Supreme Court analysis of an acquittal found that minor discrepancies between ocular and medical evidence did not undermine the prosecution case where eyewitnesses gave a consistent account and the post-mortem findings remained compatible with their version. Allegations of ante-timing in the first information report were treated as explainable and insufficient, by themselves, to infer fabrication or a different date of occurrence. The rejection of an independent eyewitness was criticised as conjectural because his testimony had no intrinsic infirmity and was corroborated by surrounding circumstances. The note also states that appellate interference with acquittal is justified where the trial or appellate court misreads evidence and reaches a perverse conclusion. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 07 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186818